Legal Opinion

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Haupt

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 21, 1990No. 89-1559PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LAVORATO, Justice.

Any agreement that would otherwise defeat the rights of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in any asset it obtains from a failed bank is invalid unless certain requirements are met. See 12 U.S.C. § 1823(e) (1982). The district court sustained the FDIC’s motion for summary judgment in an action on a guaranty of several notes the FDIC acquired from a failed bank. When the guaranty was signed, the bank orally agreed with the guarantor that the guaranty would last only until the maker secured financing to pay off the notes. When the bank failed, the purpose of the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. Federal Deposit InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Langley v. Federal Deposit InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. John W. NewhartCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989
  4. Commerce Federal Savings Bank v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
  5. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Stanley KasalCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Haupt v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1994
  2. Davis v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 2004
  3. Haupt v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API